Note 13 — Chapter XXV

They presented a formal protest, which, after rehearsing the action of their pastor in calling the special meeting, concluded:

“WE PROTEST,

“Because the committee was not appointed by the church;

“Because its action has never been approved by the church;

“Because the substance and form of the documents it has prepared have not been authorized even by the instructions given at irregular and invalid gatherings, until it was too late to offer criticism or objection;

“Because these documents, neither authorized in advance nor subsequently approved by this church, have apparently committed it to an attitude, and pledged it in advance to acts of antagonism and censure towards a near and beloved sister church, never contemplated or desired, still less resolved upon, by this church;

“Because the question of discipline, originally raised as a matter of controversy, is one upon which the record of this church is such as to make it especially necessary that we should proceed with great circumspection when seeking to advise or censure other churches—it being our own practice to drop members for absence, without censure, at every annual meeting (Manual, sec. 6, art. 2), and the practice having extended in the past, as we are informed, to members at the time currently reported to be under grave charges.

“The whole management of this case has misrepresented the spirit of this church, defeated its just right of self-government, suppressed the honest and free expression of individual opinion, and tended to subject the church to the control of a few members, without regard to the convictions of the remainder.

“We, therefore, denounce the action of the committee as a dangerous attack upon Christian liberty and Congregational polity; and we declare it to be, and to have been from the beginning, null and void.”